U.S. and U.K. Continue Hiding Torture Evidence
Bill Lindner
February 12, 2009
The U.S. Department of Justice, under the new Obama administration and the high court in the U.K. are doing everything in their powers to make sure the abuse and torture of 'terrorist' suspects -- conducted at the hands of both U.S. and British intelligence officers -- remains covered up as long as they can to protect those who willfully participated in war crimes.
ABC News reported that the Obama Administration announced that it would keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., continuing the abusive use of 'States Secret' privilege, which could in effect, keep crimes committed by Bush administration officials hidden.
The U.S. case involves five men -- including current Guantanamo detainee Binyam Mohamed, one plaintiff in an Egyptian jail, one plaintiff in a Moroccan jail and two that have since been released -- who claim they were victims of extraordinary rendition. These five men are suing a San Jose Boeing subsidiary Jeppeson Dataplan, who are accused of aiding the CIA in flying them to other countries and secret CIA camps where they were tortured.
The case was thrown out a year ago on the basis of 'national security' but an appeal brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was heard by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
President Obama's Justice Department told the Appellate Court that its position hasn't changed and that the new administration stands behind arguments that the Bush administration made with no ambiguity at all, claiming the entire subject matter remains a state secret.
Obama's Justice Department claims they will ensure that the 'state secrets' privilege is not invoked to hide information from the American people about their government's actions that they have a right to know. Obviously, that's a complete crock of crap. After everything America and the rest of the world have been subject to under the lawless Bush administration, they've earned the right to know. In essence, Obama's Justice Department -- just like Bush's Justice Department -- believes the President is above the law.
The Bush administration utilized the state secret privilege in attempts to get complete cases, rather than just documents, dismissed in order to hide their illegal activities. It's up to the courts to reject the government's false claims of state secrets and allow the victims of torture and rendition to have their day in court.
Bush Administration's Abuse Of State Secrets Privilege
As noted by Glenn Greenwald from Salon News, what was so abusive and dangerous about Bush administration's assertions of States Secret privilege -- also noted by Obama's presidential campaign -- was that it was used to compel dismissal of entire lawsuits in advance based on the claim that any judicial adjudication of even the most illegal secret government programs would harm national security, not as it was originally intended to be used, which was with specific pieces of evidence or documents.
The Bush administration negligently abused the states secret privilege. Part of their delusional modus operandi involved trying to apply the privilege not to individual pieces of evidence, but to entire cases that were indefensible because of the criminality utilized by the Bush administration, in order to get them thrown out of court. The Bush administration used that privilege when the government itself was the target of a lawsuit.
It's unfortunate that the Obama administration has decided to continue using the same deceptions used by the Bush administration. So much for 'change you can believe in.'
Also noted by Mr. Greenwald is the fact that when federal courts accept the executive branch's state secrets claims as absolute, our system of checks and balances breaks down. When federal courts give the executive branch the ability to violate American laws and constitutional rights without any accountability or oversight, innocent victims -- as in the case of Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. -- are not able to obtain justice.
More information on the ongoing case before the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals can be found from AlterNet, The New York Times and The Los Angeles Times. More information on the Obama administration's decision to continue the questionable tactics utilized by the Bush administration to keep their crimes covered up can be found from The Washington Post, Salon News, The Atlantic, The Public Record, The Raw Story and Harper's Magazine.
Alleged Threats By U.S. against U.K. In Torture Case
In a U.K. high court ruling, evidence of how a British resident -- Binyam Mohamed, seized and held incommunicado in Pakistan in 2002 before being rendered to Morocco where he says he was tortured -- held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was tortured and what MI5 knew about it must reportedly remain secret because of serious threats the U.S. has allegedly made against the U.K.
The Age UK reported on a flurry of letters between the British Foreign Office and the U.S. State Department that revealed that Washington did threaten to withdraw intelligence-sharing with Britain if documents related to the alleged torture of a British terrorism detainee in Guantanamo Bay were made public. The judges were not happy with their decision but said they had no alternative.
Conservative MP David Davis, former shadow home secretary, said ministers must urgently respond to allegations that Britain was complicit in torture, and demanded a Commons statement from the government on the ruling, saying it was a matter of utmost national importance.
Davis said the ruling implies that torture has taken place in the Binyam Mohamed case, that British agencies may have been complicit, that the U.S. government has threatened the high court that it will withdraw its intelligence cooperation with the U.K and that the judge ruled that there is strong public interest to put the information in the public domain even though it's politically embarrassing.
The ruling from the high court was one of the latest in a long-running and unprecedented series of court hearings regarding the abduction of Binyam Mohamed who was subsequently flown to Afghanistan before being rendered to Guantanamo Bay.
U.S. Rationale "Difficult To Conceive"
The ruling judges found it "difficult to conceive" the rationale for U.S. objections over releasing the information that contained "no disclosure of sensitive intelligence matters" regarding how U.S. officials treated detainees.
The judges were taken aback by the severity of the threat made by the U.S. government. They didn't consider that a democracy governed by the rule of law would expect a court in another democracy to suppress a summary of the evidence contained in reports by its own officials.
The threat to withdraw cooperation remains in place under the new administration of President Barack Obama.
Mohamed's lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, said both governments had a duty to investigate torture claims and not suppress evidence that it had happened, saying the U.K. was guilty of "capitulation to blackmail" by not disclosing the evidence.
Mohamed was originally charged with involvement in a "dirty bomb" plot, but that charge was dropped and U.S. authorities said new ones could be brought.
Documents Describe Gruesome Interrogation Tactics
Days after issuing the first report saying U.S. officials had threatened UK officials, The Telegraph UK reported that the documents in question actually contained details of how British intelligence officers supplied information to Mohamed's captors and contributed questions while he was gruesomely tortured. In fact, it was British officials, not Americans, who did not want the documents revealed for fear that it would leave serving MI6 officers open to prosecution.
The gruesome torture the documents describe includes 25 lines that were reportedly edited out, containing details of how Mr. Mohamed's genitals were sliced with a scalpel and other torture methods so extreme that waterboarding is "very far down the list of things they did." British intelligence officers knew about the torture and did nothing about it.
It appears more likely that Labour Ministers, not Americans, stand to be embarrassed by the documents in the U.K case. The Labour Ministers are being protected by the secrecy surrounding the case.
All terror charges were dropped against Mohamed last year, but he remains at Guantanamo Bay and is currently on a hunger strike. More on the assertions that the U.K. was threatened by the U.S. can be found here and allegations that Britain was complicit in torture can be found here from The BBC. According to the Guardian UK, torture evidence in the Binyam Mohamed is being hidden from President Obama.
Anyone hoping to see a new era take place after Barack Obama was elected to the presidency is waking to the reality that, after campaigning on the premise of change, politics as usual in Washington will continue. People are committing treason to keep crimes committed by the Bush administration covered up.
The U.S. and the U.K. are continuing to try and hide grotesque torture committed in the fraudulent 'war on terror.' What are they hiding from us? We'd all like to know. It's time for the truth to come out and it's time for those guilty of committing treasonous crimes to be held accountable, regardless of who they are.
ABC News reported that the Obama Administration announced that it would keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., continuing the abusive use of 'States Secret' privilege, which could in effect, keep crimes committed by Bush administration officials hidden.
The U.S. case involves five men -- including current Guantanamo detainee Binyam Mohamed, one plaintiff in an Egyptian jail, one plaintiff in a Moroccan jail and two that have since been released -- who claim they were victims of extraordinary rendition. These five men are suing a San Jose Boeing subsidiary Jeppeson Dataplan, who are accused of aiding the CIA in flying them to other countries and secret CIA camps where they were tortured.
The case was thrown out a year ago on the basis of 'national security' but an appeal brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was heard by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
President Obama's Justice Department told the Appellate Court that its position hasn't changed and that the new administration stands behind arguments that the Bush administration made with no ambiguity at all, claiming the entire subject matter remains a state secret.
Obama's Justice Department claims they will ensure that the 'state secrets' privilege is not invoked to hide information from the American people about their government's actions that they have a right to know. Obviously, that's a complete crock of crap. After everything America and the rest of the world have been subject to under the lawless Bush administration, they've earned the right to know. In essence, Obama's Justice Department -- just like Bush's Justice Department -- believes the President is above the law.
The Bush administration utilized the state secret privilege in attempts to get complete cases, rather than just documents, dismissed in order to hide their illegal activities. It's up to the courts to reject the government's false claims of state secrets and allow the victims of torture and rendition to have their day in court.
Bush Administration's Abuse Of State Secrets Privilege
As noted by Glenn Greenwald from Salon News, what was so abusive and dangerous about Bush administration's assertions of States Secret privilege -- also noted by Obama's presidential campaign -- was that it was used to compel dismissal of entire lawsuits in advance based on the claim that any judicial adjudication of even the most illegal secret government programs would harm national security, not as it was originally intended to be used, which was with specific pieces of evidence or documents.
The Bush administration negligently abused the states secret privilege. Part of their delusional modus operandi involved trying to apply the privilege not to individual pieces of evidence, but to entire cases that were indefensible because of the criminality utilized by the Bush administration, in order to get them thrown out of court. The Bush administration used that privilege when the government itself was the target of a lawsuit.
It's unfortunate that the Obama administration has decided to continue using the same deceptions used by the Bush administration. So much for 'change you can believe in.'
Also noted by Mr. Greenwald is the fact that when federal courts accept the executive branch's state secrets claims as absolute, our system of checks and balances breaks down. When federal courts give the executive branch the ability to violate American laws and constitutional rights without any accountability or oversight, innocent victims -- as in the case of Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. -- are not able to obtain justice.
More information on the ongoing case before the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals can be found from AlterNet, The New York Times and The Los Angeles Times. More information on the Obama administration's decision to continue the questionable tactics utilized by the Bush administration to keep their crimes covered up can be found from The Washington Post, Salon News, The Atlantic, The Public Record, The Raw Story and Harper's Magazine.
Alleged Threats By U.S. against U.K. In Torture Case
In a U.K. high court ruling, evidence of how a British resident -- Binyam Mohamed, seized and held incommunicado in Pakistan in 2002 before being rendered to Morocco where he says he was tortured -- held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was tortured and what MI5 knew about it must reportedly remain secret because of serious threats the U.S. has allegedly made against the U.K.
The Age UK reported on a flurry of letters between the British Foreign Office and the U.S. State Department that revealed that Washington did threaten to withdraw intelligence-sharing with Britain if documents related to the alleged torture of a British terrorism detainee in Guantanamo Bay were made public. The judges were not happy with their decision but said they had no alternative.
Conservative MP David Davis, former shadow home secretary, said ministers must urgently respond to allegations that Britain was complicit in torture, and demanded a Commons statement from the government on the ruling, saying it was a matter of utmost national importance.
Davis said the ruling implies that torture has taken place in the Binyam Mohamed case, that British agencies may have been complicit, that the U.S. government has threatened the high court that it will withdraw its intelligence cooperation with the U.K and that the judge ruled that there is strong public interest to put the information in the public domain even though it's politically embarrassing.
The ruling from the high court was one of the latest in a long-running and unprecedented series of court hearings regarding the abduction of Binyam Mohamed who was subsequently flown to Afghanistan before being rendered to Guantanamo Bay.
U.S. Rationale "Difficult To Conceive"
The ruling judges found it "difficult to conceive" the rationale for U.S. objections over releasing the information that contained "no disclosure of sensitive intelligence matters" regarding how U.S. officials treated detainees.
The judges were taken aback by the severity of the threat made by the U.S. government. They didn't consider that a democracy governed by the rule of law would expect a court in another democracy to suppress a summary of the evidence contained in reports by its own officials.
The threat to withdraw cooperation remains in place under the new administration of President Barack Obama.
Mohamed's lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, said both governments had a duty to investigate torture claims and not suppress evidence that it had happened, saying the U.K. was guilty of "capitulation to blackmail" by not disclosing the evidence.
Mohamed was originally charged with involvement in a "dirty bomb" plot, but that charge was dropped and U.S. authorities said new ones could be brought.
Documents Describe Gruesome Interrogation Tactics
Days after issuing the first report saying U.S. officials had threatened UK officials, The Telegraph UK reported that the documents in question actually contained details of how British intelligence officers supplied information to Mohamed's captors and contributed questions while he was gruesomely tortured. In fact, it was British officials, not Americans, who did not want the documents revealed for fear that it would leave serving MI6 officers open to prosecution.
The gruesome torture the documents describe includes 25 lines that were reportedly edited out, containing details of how Mr. Mohamed's genitals were sliced with a scalpel and other torture methods so extreme that waterboarding is "very far down the list of things they did." British intelligence officers knew about the torture and did nothing about it.
It appears more likely that Labour Ministers, not Americans, stand to be embarrassed by the documents in the U.K case. The Labour Ministers are being protected by the secrecy surrounding the case.
All terror charges were dropped against Mohamed last year, but he remains at Guantanamo Bay and is currently on a hunger strike. More on the assertions that the U.K. was threatened by the U.S. can be found here and allegations that Britain was complicit in torture can be found here from The BBC. According to the Guardian UK, torture evidence in the Binyam Mohamed is being hidden from President Obama.
Anyone hoping to see a new era take place after Barack Obama was elected to the presidency is waking to the reality that, after campaigning on the premise of change, politics as usual in Washington will continue. People are committing treason to keep crimes committed by the Bush administration covered up.
The U.S. and the U.K. are continuing to try and hide grotesque torture committed in the fraudulent 'war on terror.' What are they hiding from us? We'd all like to know. It's time for the truth to come out and it's time for those guilty of committing treasonous crimes to be held accountable, regardless of who they are.
Print
Email
